In the Interest of B.H.A., Minor Child
Appellant appeals the juvenile court’s denial of her petition to terminate the father’s parental rights as not in the best interest of the child, despite finding appellant had proven the elements of abandonment of the child by clear and convincing evidence.
J.R., Mother-Petitioner-Appellant
M.A., Father-Respondent-Appellee
Attorney for Appellant Mother
Judith O'Donohoe
Attorney for Appellee Father
Danielle M. DeBower
Guardian ad litem
Ann M. Troge
Supreme Court
Oral Argument Schedule
Non-Oral
Nov 18, 2019 9:00 AM
Briefs
Supreme Court Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Date Amended:
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Summary
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Karen Kaufman Salic, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Potterfield and Tabor, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, J. Dissent by Vaitheswaran, P.J. (19 pages)
A mother appeals the juvenile court order denying her petition to terminate the parental rights of her son’s father under Iowa Code chapter 600A (2017). She contends the juvenile court incorrectly concluded termination is not in the child’s best interests despite the father’s incarceration in another state and far-off release date, long history of substance abuse, and abandonment of the child. OPINION HOLDS: Because the best-interests standard for private termination under chapter 600A differs from that under chapter 232, we are not prepared to write off the possibility the father will be a positive influence in the child’s life. The mother did not carry her burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interests at this time. DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectfully dissent. I would reverse the denial of the termination petition and remand for entry of an order granting the mother’s termination petition.